nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Have we reach peak LGBT nonsense?

antiskeptic

Haven't read the detail but in essence a rugby players career called a halt to because he said gays and various other sinners will go to hell.

Leaving aside his dodgy theology (if God was in the business of excluding sinners from heaven then nobody would "get there"), is this not a case of LGBT sensitivity gone mad?

You are now not allowed to state your belief?

I can understand that some in A&A might rejoice but surely many can see the deeper ramifications: that at another time and place, their own expression of belief might not be of the moment and be condemned for mere expression.

Thin end of a thick wedge, this one.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

smacl

Varta wrote: »

How would a gay Liverpool player feel about Mo Salah's constant praying and devotion, knowing that religion's attitude to gay people? The same can be said for David Luiz.

Wouldn't give a damn I'd imagine. Islam is homophobic, but then as we see from this thread, so is fundamental Christianity. It's not the praying that's the problem, nor holding unpleasant religious beliefs, it is specifically highlighting the homophobia and declaring your support for it on public media.

cgcsb

Varta wrote: »

How would a gay Liverpool player feel about Mo Salah's constant praying and devotion, knowing that religion's attitude to gay people? The same can be said for David Luiz.

There is private beliefs and there's opening your word hole, different kettle of fish.

cgcsb

eagle eye wrote: »

Vunipola warned by Saracens for supporting Folau. This is becoming ridiculous.

Time for a new rugby union organisation which allows you to have an opinion.

best of luck. The lads aren't hired for being smart

cgcsb

eagle eye wrote: »

I don't think it's fair to call Folau homophobic. He is just calling them sinners not showing any fear of them.

homophobia = fear and/or hatred of homosexuals

eagle eye

cgcsb wrote:

Where some people are getting hung up is they think such statements are a-ok so long as you claim that this is part of your religious beliefs. But of course, it is not ok.

It is part of the religious beliefs of many.

eagle eye

cgcsb wrote:

homophobia = fear and/or hatred of homosexuals

So he believes that it's wrong and they will burn in hell. I don't hear see fear and/or hatred.

cgcsb

eagle eye wrote: »

It is part of the religious beliefs of many.

That's fine, polite society doesn't have to entertain it, give it a platform or endorse it with contracts of employment.

cgcsb

eagle eye wrote: »

So he believes that it's wrong and they will burn in hell. I don't hear see fear and/or hatred.

then you're blind and/or deaf

batgoat

eagle eye wrote: »

Vunipola warned by Saracens for supporting Folau. This is becoming ridiculous.

Time for a new rugby union organisation which allows you to have an opinion.

A Gab for rugby, yep that'll totally take off...

smacl

eagle eye wrote: »

So he believes that it's wrong and they will burn in hell. I don't hear see fear and/or hatred.

Suggesting that someone will be forced to endure an eternity in torment for being gay would amount to hatred in most peoples books. Now as an atheist, I might be well aware that this is a load of specious homophobic nonsense, but there are gay Christians who might think differently and that this constitutes a real danger. If your religious beliefs are that obnoxious that they call for the undeserved suffering of others, and you broadcast them to those others, it seems reasonable you'll encounter some serious backlash. Praying to Allah, Vishnu or the flying spaghetti monster that you'll win the footie is not even similar.

cgcsb

batgoat wrote: »

A Gab for rugby, yep that'll totally take off...

Am registering my interest in shares now, DYING to hear what Australian rugby players REALLY think, if anything.

Ave Sodalis

eagle eye wrote:

So he believes that it's wrong and they will burn in hell. I don't hear see fear and/or hatred.

I'm sorry but the level of excuse making, pedanticness and word play on this thread is ridiculous. The player was fired for publically being a homophobic ahole, and potentially causing a lot of hurt to fellow players and fans. The lengths people are going to to find a way of excusing this is crazy. He was not fired for having these beliefs, or he would have been fired last year. He was fired for making a show of himself, and for actions that are akin to bullying.

You can say or do whatever you want, but when saying and doing whatever you want affects other people, then there are consequences. It's a pretty standard rule across the board. If we reasoned the way some of the posters here are reasoning, we'd still be in the dark ages. Women and black people would still be considered lesser people, and gay people would still be prosecuted. By using the exact same logic, bullies in school should just be let run rampant because they have the right to free speech and therefore name calling and teasing is okay. Nobody should ever be barred from a business because a customer has the right to free speech and therefore it's fine to abuse staff.

There are limits to free speech, particularly when it affects other people, and even more particularly when representing something else that does not hold to the same twisted values. I don't believe this is so difficult to comprehend and therefore can only conclude that posters are being pedantic for the sake of it.

eagle eye

smacl wrote:

Suggesting that someone will be forced to endure an eternity in torment for being gay would amount to hatred in most peoples books. Now as an atheist, I might be well aware that this is a load of specious homophobic nonsense, but there are gay Christians who might think differently and that this constitutes a real danger. If your religious beliefs are that obnoxious that they call for the undeserved suffering of others, and you broadcast them to those others, it seems reasonable you'll encounter some serious backlash. Praying to Allah, Vishnu or the flying spaghetti monster that you'll win the footie is not even similar.

I'm not religious myself but I believe everybody has the right to practice religion. I also believe that everybody has the right to voice their opinion.
I think the world is a better place if people are allowed to voice their opinion without fear of repercussions like losing their job.
I think bottling people up is a huge mistake. The kids of people like this often turn out to be the real bad ones.

salmocab

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm not religious myself but I believe everybody has the right to practice religion. I also believe that everybody has the right to voice their opinion.
I think the world is a better place if people are allowed to voice their opinion without fear of repercussions like losing their job.
I think bottling people up is a huge mistake. The kids of people like this often turn out to be the real bad ones.

To bring that point along it would be okay for someone to voice their nazi propaganda without fear of losing their job? I’m glad I live in this world and not the one you want.

cgcsb

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm not religious myself but I believe everybody has the right to practice religion. I also believe that everybody has the right to voice their opinion.
I think the world is a better place if people are allowed to voice their opinion without fear of repercussions like losing their job.
I think bottling people up is a huge mistake. The kids of people like this often turn out to be the real bad ones.

Where does that end? basically you're looking to give hatespeach protected status.

sydthebeat

eagle eye wrote: »

I also believe that everybody has the right to voice their opinion.

Without consequences?

If I called you a bigoted as$hole for what you've posted already in this thread.... Do you think there would be / deserve to be consequences?

We all have the right to say what we think, but we don't have the right to do it without there being consequences.

You fail to understand this.

Penn

People think free speech means they can say what they like. However, other people using their free speech to challenge them is somehow not allowed, or "shutting down free speech".

People think free speech means they should be given a platform to spread their ideas. However, other people using their free speech to challenge them being given a platform is somehow not allowed, or "shutting down free speech".

People think free speech means that just because you can say something doesn't mean you should. However, other people pointing that out is somehow not allowed, or "shutting down free speech".

Ultimately, free speech works both ways. Defamation, hate speech etc notwithstanding, the freedom to say what you want also comes with it the freedom of people to challenge you on it. The freedom to use platforms to spread your ideas also comes with it the freedom of other people to challenge the platforms you've been given. The freedom to say what you want also comes with it the freedom of people to call you a knob.

eagle eye

sydthebeat wrote:

If I called you a bigoted as$hole for what you've posted already in this thread.... Do you think there would be / deserve to be consequences?

I wouldn't take great offense to it. You are entitled to your opinion but I'd disagree with it.
I don't see why that is a big deal.
Now when it gets to a stage where you are trying to invite people to do things then it becomes wrong. As long as it's just an opinion and it's not about actively physically going face to face with people I've no issue with it.

Varta

salmocab wrote: »

So long as he keeps his views to himself I doubt they’d care. It’s not his views but expressing publicily them that are the problem.

I have to disagree with you there. It's a bit like knowing that there is a bomb in your car but if you can't hear it ticking then you don't have to deal with it. I think people go after the easy targets because either they are afraid to tackle the real issue or they would have something to lose themselves in doing so. Many people who share his faith will call for him to be sacked. Religious superstition creates an awful lot of hypocrites.

salmocab

Varta wrote: »

I have to disagree with you there. It's a bit like knowing that there is a bomb in your car but if you can't hear it ticking then you don't have to deal with it. I think people go after the easy targets because either they are afraid to tackle the real issue or they would have something to lose themselves in doing so. Many people who share his faith will call for him to be sacked. Religious superstition creates an awful lot of hypocrites.

It’s nothing like a bomb in a car, they didn’t go after an easy target he made himself the target and his employer reacted. Of course religion is full of hypocrites it always has been and as long more as it survives it will. That’s a different point though. Do you honestly think that after IF posted that meme that his employer should have done nothing and the fans, supporters and sponsors should have said and done nothing?

jim o doom

The issue is that this man is voicing his opinion on a widescale public forum, granted to him by his fame and position and is likely to cause serious mental harm to many members of the public who hear it, gay people who already struggle with their identity.

It's one thing to have a bigoted opinion and it's another to voice it in a group of people where it can be directly challenged..

However it is significantly different when he is making a blanket statement on a public forum, one which he has been contractually obliged to not make, which brings his entire sport and team into disrepute and again which causes harm to innocent fans of the sport.

If he didn't have the right to free speech, he couldn't have made that comment. But he does have free speech, he did make the comment (aware of the likely consequences) and now he will suffer the consequences.

If you were in a pub and a man verbally abused your spouse (as per free speech), do you think he would get away with it? In that position, many people, myself included, would beat the man abusing their spouse into the ground.

Varta

salmocab wrote: »

It’s nothing like a bomb in a car, they didn’t go after an easy target he made himself the target and his employer reacted. Of course religion is full of hypocrites it always has been and as long more as it survives it will. That’s a different point though. Do you honestly think that after IF posted that meme that his employer should have done nothing and the fans, supporters and sponsors should have said and done nothing?

I think you'll find that the majority of fans and supporters would have said and done nothing other than to laugh at his religious nonsense. But some people were ready to pounce on it as a way of promoting their cause. Employers and sponsors will always take the route that is likely to cost them less money.

Anteayer

Deleted User wrote: »

Multi denominational schools are meant to also cater for non believers.

90% of schools in Ireland are catholic. Just because they are public does not remove that. They are religious.

You'd wonder actually. The way the legislation was originally framed, it was impossible to have a non-denominational just 'normal' school. I'm not sure if that's changed.

salmocab

Varta wrote: »

I think you'll find that the majority of fans and supporters would have said and done nothing other than to laugh at his religious nonsense. But some people were ready to pounce on it as a way of promoting their cause. Employers and sponsors will always take the route that is likely to cost them less money.

So if you think the majority wouldn’t have cared then it follows that a minority would have been offended and would want some action?
What about his team mates who don’t want that sort of hate around them or his coaches?
He did what he did knowing the likely outcome and got what he deserved.

Varta

salmocab wrote: »

So if you think the majority wouldn’t have cared then it follows that a minority would have been offended and would want some action?
What about his team mates who don’t want that sort of hate around them or his coaches?
He did what he did knowing the likely outcome and got what he deserved.

Are you by any chance religious? I ask because you seem reluctant to address the source of his preaching. You also seem reluctant to address the fact I mentioned that a devout Muslim (Salah) and a devout Christian (Luiz) constantly push their religious expression onto their team mates and fans. Religions that have been explicit in their condemnation and worse of gay people.

salmocab

Varta wrote: »

Are you by any chance religious? I ask because you seem reluctant to address the source of his preaching. You also seem reluctant to address the fact I mentioned that a devout Muslim (Salah) and a devout Christian (Luiz) constantly push their religious expression onto their team mates and fans. Religions that have been explicit in their condemnation and worse of gay people.

No I’m an atheist not that it matters. The source of his preaching to me is horse ****, people are free to do what they want and worship who or what they want. They can’t however expect the rest of society to put up with their hate.
Also I did address your points about Salah and Luiz.

Varta

salmocab wrote: »

No I’m an atheist not that it matters. The source of his preaching to me is horse ****, people are free to do what they want and worship who or what they want. They can’t however expect the rest of society to put up with their hate.
Also I did address your points about Salah and Luiz.

But society is putting up with it. Calling out Folau is nothing. It does nothing to tackle the source of the hate. There is a massive reluctance to tackle the hate, most likely because to do so would clash with people's own superstitions.

salmocab

Varta wrote: »

But society is putting up with it. Calling out Folau is nothing. It does nothing to tackle the source of the hate. There is a massive reluctance to tackle the hate, most likely because to do so would clash with people's own superstitions.

I don’t think anyone thinks that calling out Folau as you put it does anything to tackle the wider problem but that doesn’t mean he should be let say what he wants without repurcussion.

splinter65

Varta wrote: »

Are you by any chance religious? I ask because you seem reluctant to address the source of his preaching. You also seem reluctant to address the fact I mentioned that a devout Muslim (Salah) and a devout Christian (Luiz) constantly push their religious expression onto their team mates and fans. Religions that have been explicit in their condemnation and worse of gay people.

Are Salah Mane Lukaku etc to be denied religious freedom on the remote grounds that they may be making teammates feel slightly uncomfortable? Do you realize how preposterous that sounds? Where does that end? People have freedom of religion. If someone believes for religious reasons that homosexual intercourses is sinful then they’re entitled to hold that belief.
You’re not going to be permitted to tell people what they can and cannot think.
If this guy is sacked over this then fine, he obviously thinks he’d rather be out of a job then working for an employer who won’t allow him his beliefs.
It doesn’t matter what you say or do you will never be able to control people and make them conform to your ideology. Never.

cgcsb

Varta wrote: »

I think you'll find that the majority of fans and supporters would have said and done nothing other than to laugh at his religious nonsense. But some people were ready to pounce on it as a way of promoting their cause. Employers and sponsors will always take the route that is likely to cost them less money.

Absolutely, will pounce in ignorant sh!te as often as I get the chance.